Etiquette WAS Re: polite Dumbledore?

[spotsgal]

No: HPFGUIDX 142648

> Alla:
> 
> I suspect that I will be arguing semantics again, but here is what I 
> think. I DO believe that Dumbledore was being polite. But the 
> meaning of word "polite" I am using is to " use kind words", no more 
> than that.
> 
> I do NOT think that Dumbledore was being RESPECTFUL to Dursleys, in 
> that I suspect I agree with a_svirn. Am I making sense? He was being 
> polite as in "using formalities", but definitely not respecting them 
> as people.

Christina:

He says polite words, but there's a definite edge.  He doesn't use a
sarcastic tone, but that seems to be his intent.  He might do some
polite *things*, but he doesn't mean them in a polite way.  And plenty
of what he does is not at all polite, IMO, including offering the
Dursleys drinks (particularly since he uses magic to do so).

> Alla:
> I don't know whether JKR wrote this scene because Harry needed to 
> hear it or some readers did ( myself definitely included), but I am 
> absolutely happy that she did.

Christina:

JKR does seem to like writing in cathartic moments; I think there's
one in every book pertaining to Draco Malfoy.

> a_svirn:
>
> Well, it was Dumbledore who left him to their tender mercies in
> the first place. They certainly didn't ask for the job.
>
>Alla:
>
>True, true of course Dumbledore left Harry there and if Petunia was
>not Lily's sister, I would completely agree with you. No matter how
>much I hate the characters of Dursleys, they did NOT ask for the job
>of caring for Harry. BUT to me and to me only the fact that Petunia
>IS Lily's sister changes everything.

Christina:

Well, we know that it does, because Harry being in the Dursley's care
was the only way to seal the blood charm on Harry and protect him from
Voldemort.  However, I think that it's worth mentioning that the
Dursleys have definitely assumed an increased risk since they took
Harry in.  Not only didn't the Dursleys ask for the job, but they have
been placed in harm's way because of it (ie, Dudley and the Dementors).

> a_svirn:
> Besides, what it 
> > has to say to anything? They may be as bad as they come, but 
> > Dumbledore behaviour would still be a "glorious" bit of bullying.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> To me this scene was another example of "poetic justice" or " 
> vicarious retribution".

Christina:

I agree with a_svirn.  This is bullying; I get the same vibe from
reading the Dumbledore/Dursley interaction as I do when I read
"Snape's Worst Memory" or almost anything involving Malfoy.  

> > a_svirn:
> > What do you mean "for a change"? We have seen wizards being rude 
> to 
> > them on Harry's behalf from the book 1.
> >
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Could you refresh my recollection, please? Do you mean those who 
> came to Vernon on the street to congratulate him in PS/SS?
> If yes, I don't see it as rudeness, but more like desire to share 
> the overwhelming happiness with anybody, even with Vernon. 

Christina:

I don't think that wizards have necessarily been *rude* to the
Dursleys, per se, but I do want to discuss the situation in light of a
topic we've talked a lot about in the past, which is Snape's relative
"bad-ness" of his actions due to the fact that he "preys" on those
that are considered weaker than he is (ie, children).  I know a lot of
people consider Snape's primary character flaw his tendency to prey on
those weaker than himself (although I believe he learned that from
James and Sirius, but that's another thread), and I've definitely
spoken to people who have said that it is this behavior that prevents
them from thinking that Snape can ever come to any good.  I'd really
like to hear from people in this camp regarding the Dumbledore/Dursley
scene.  

I bring this up here because, while I don't think many wizards have
been outright rude to the Dursleys, there are many cases of the
Dursleys being victimized by wizards.  Hagrid gives Dudley a magical
tail.  Harry delights in freaking out the Dursleys at the end of PoA
by telling them that his murdering godfather has broken out of prison
and will be keeping an eye on him.  Mad-Eye Moody scares Vernon half
to death with his magical eye.  Fred and George do the same by
enlarging Dudley's tongue.  I know that they say in the book that they
didn't target Dudley *because* he was a Muggle, but that doesn't
change the fact that the act is more cruel because he *is* a Muggle. 
Compare this to the Snape situation- Snape doesn't target Harry
because he is a child (he is mean to adults, too), but his behavior
towards Harry is still worse than his behavior towards, say, Sirius,
because Harry is a child, and he is weaker than Snape (who is an
authority figure).

My point is, the fact that the Dursleys are Muggles and don't
understand magic is constantly exploited by wizards.  This is what
bothers me most about the Dumbledore/Dursley meeting.  As much as we
cry foul when Position-of-Authority!Snape picks on Child!Harry, people
seem shockingly approving when Dumbledore does the exact same thing to
the Dursleys.  He is clearly is a position of power, and he uses that
to his advantage.  Yes, the Dursleys are bad people who have been very
mean to Harry, but think about things from their point of view.  They
are constantly being intimidated by people from a world they are not a
part of who have weapons that they don't understand.  They have no
means of protecting themselves against the use of magic, and the
wizarding world seems open to exploiting this, Dumbledore included. 
His actions at the Dursleys' house, particularly the fact that he uses
magic, are basically a big huge sign saying, "I am in control of this
situation."  Which, to go back to the original question, is the
epitome of rude when you are in the home of another person.


Christina